MK MP300 THX Ultra 2 Speaker Package Review & Comments

@AudioVisualOnline

Hi Dan

The comparison with Kef Reference is a bit irrelevant imho as they're two very different kinds of speakers ie full range floor standers and a sub sat system.

I'd be far more interested in a more direct comparison. The MP300 system for a 7.2 set up comes to about £22k. I think something like the JBL Synthesis Array One would come out at a similar price?

Would you happen to have heard a JBL Synthesis set up? I'd be interested in your thoughts if you have.

Thanks
 
@AudioVisualOnline

Hi Dan

The comparison with Kef Reference is a bit irrelevant imho as they're two very different kinds of speakers ie full range floor standers and a sub sat system.

In a way it is an irrelevant comparison, but in another way youre comparing full range reproduction of sound, just from two different ideas about hows best to reproduce that. Aesthetics is another subject entirely.
I'd be far more interested in a more direct comparison. The MP300 system for a 7.2 set up comes to about £22k. I think something like the JBL Synthesis Array One would come out at a similar price?

Would you happen to have heard a JBL Synthesis set up? I'd be interested in your thoughts if you have.

Thanks
Ive only heard some big JBL's at a HiFi show last year. Ive never been a big fan of horn loading but to be fair I thought they sounded pretty good and they filled a pretty big room too. Given the price tag though, I remember I couldnt really hear anything that made me think it was any better than what a sub/sat system was doing with much smaller speakers for a lot less money.

Thats a subjective view from a show though so it probably not worth a lot, and even though Ive never heard a horn loaded system Ive particularly liked, that doesnt necessarily mean it applies to all horn loaded systems either.

Sorry I cant be of more help.
 
Ive heard the JBL Synthesis one array several times and it's good.

The 300's are a more room friendly speaker system IMO.

I also feel that the 300's have a more detailed presentation as they are designed for accurate studio mixing/monitoring.
 
Last edited:
In a way it is an irrelevant comparison, but in another way youre comparing full range reproduction of sound, just from two different ideas about hows best to reproduce that. Aesthetics is another subject entirely.
Ive only heard some big JBL's at a HiFi show last year. Ive never been a big fan of horn loading but to be fair I thought they sounded pretty good and they filled a pretty big room too. Given the price tag though, I remember I couldnt really hear anything that made me think it was any better than what a sub/sat system was doing with much smaller speakers for a lot less money.

Thats a subjective view from a show though so it probably not worth a lot, and even though Ive never heard a horn loaded system Ive particularly liked, that doesnt necessarily mean it applies to all horn loaded systems either.

Sorry I cant be of more help.


Thanks, I've never actually heard a horn loaded system so I note your comments with interest.

The JBL synthesis speakers seem to have a very different design approach to the new MKs which I find very interesting.

Cheers
 
Indus, seriously - go listen to a horn based system if you can: certain pro cinema speakers show most consumer speakers a clean pair of heels imho, but it all comes down to application, priorities, space etc.
 
I think youll definitely fins a horn based system will go loud, very loud. I always find them a little too forward, they strain my ears when cranked up, which I put down to the way horns work. Definitely something to demo for yourself as Smurfin says.
 
I think youll definitely fins a horn based system will go loud, very loud. I always find them a little too forward, they strain my ears when cranked up, which I put down to the way horns work. Definitely something to demo for yourself as Smurfin says.

Personally, having lived with my horn based speakers for the best part of around 3 years - the issue of strain comes in due to how dynamic the speakers are.

When you're listening to voices, their is no strain. You listen to a cat meeoeing, their is no strain.

However, if the processing is decent and the soundtrack is decent, if you listen to an explosion, well it will damn well sounds like an explosion, so depending on what volume yourse listening at, you may be asking for trouble..but the bottom line is it will be a dynamic sound...and it has the potential to strain your ears. Personally, I love it. The level of immersion is ridiculous compared to any of the speakers I've owned or heard.

I remember listening to a friends Gen 8050s. The clarity through a Datasat Ap20 with Dirac engaged was startling. We had the volume at reference and although it was loud and clear- it was missing the dynamism.

For those that visited the Genesis Technologies demo room that had the Pro Audio system installed- the roar of the T-Rex from the original Jurassic Park is another good example of how dynamic the horns are. When I tried that clip at my house, even without Dirac engaged, all I could think was, bloody hell, the dinosaur is here!!

@indus, definitely worth having a listen to a quality horn system.
 
T
Personally, having lived with my horn based speakers for the best part of around 3 years - the issue of strain comes in due to how dynamic the speakers are.

When you're listening to voices, their is no strain. You listen to a cat meeoeing, their is no strain.

However, if the processing is decent and the soundtrack is decent, if you listen to an explosion, well it will damn well sounds like an explosion, so depending on what volume yourse listening at, you may be asking for trouble..but the bottom line is it will be a dynamic sound...and it has the potential to strain your ears. Personally, I love it. The level of immersion is ridiculous compared to any of the speakers I've owned or heard.

I remember listening to a friends Gen 8050s. The clarity through a Datasat Ap20 with Dirac engaged was startling. We had the volume at reference and although it was loud and clear- it was missing the dynamism.

For those that visited the Genesis Technologies demo room that had the Pro Audio system installed- the roar of the T-Rex from the original Jurassic Park is another good example of how dynamic the horns are. When I tried that clip at my house, even without Dirac engaged, all I could think was, bloody hell, the dinosaur is here!!

@indus, definitely worth having a listen to a quality horn system.



Thanks very much.:)

I'll ask one quick question please and then I'll stop going on about horns as I'm taking the thread off topic.

Which Pro Audio speakers do you have?
 
T




Thanks very much.:)

I'll ask one quick question please and then I'll stop going on about horns as I'm taking the thread off topic.

Which Pro Audio speakers do you have?

Quick answer, then we'll get back on topic. I own Pro Audio Technology speakers..model numbers in my kit list-each speaker is a biamplified active matched to its own dedicated DSP amp.
 
Quick answer, then we'll get back on topic. I own Pro Audio Technology speakers..model numbers in my kit list-each speaker is a biamplified active matched to its own dedicated DSP amp.


Ah yes. I've been browsing on my phone and the signature doesn't appear, I can see it now that I'm on my laptop.

Thanks
 
I just calculated the cost of all my stuff at RRP and it's an eye watering £40k system - I had no idea, as I would wince at some of Steinway's prices, tho they are some of the best speakers I've heard.

Now that I have my Lyndorf SDA amps hooked up and using the Anthem MRX 720 as a dedicated processor with the MK300 series I have almost about faced on DSU & Neural:X, I'll explain why..

I thought ARC would have a hard time with the MK150 tripoles on the ceiling, these actually needed less correction than anything else and to my surprise everything else was pretty good, the coffee table still harasses 115hz and the room shape snatches a touch of 50hz but it's all EQ'ed back in.

I have never liked processed heights/wides, if you ever wanted to make something sound bigger but thinner then that's what you used and this is back in the days of Yamaha's DSP engines. Denon did a better job with the Atmos DSU and the same with Neural:X but while tracking down a possible driver fault (turned out to be an amp channel) I noticed that they were pretty much adding the surround channels into the heights.. fair enough if you like that sound and admittedly I got used to it and quite liked it.

Because I had to go back to 7.1 for a while I noticed I wasn't loosing much and the in room MK300's were doing such a good job I wasn't bothered with no DSU. It was only when I got everything hooked up again, re-eq'ed and had a good listen that I noticed once again, like old skool heights it's snatching away the lower mids from the base layer - ok, It could be Anthem's algorithm but I don't think so - native Atmos doesn't suffer this way, obviously even with it only metadata and not dedicated channels.

Take it for what it is and also how easy it is to get caught up in the world of upmixing and over processing - it can certainly get way out of hand in the studio as you have pretty much every effect on hand, but then end up stacking them in and endless loop of correction.

I go back to the review on the transparency comments, these things will bring stuff to your attention with good amplification on the end and that may be good or bad from source, but it will be correct and having 3 speakers across the front with the same drivers definitely helps as it tidied up the 90hz+ range with voices - this is one thing I noticed from swapping out my KEF reference 205/2 & 202c? which btw isn't a cheap speaker either and also very good.

just a 2 cents comment from observations and experience.
 
If you are looking for the best quality speakers for a home cinema I think you need to consider what the different options are primarily designed for.

MK speakers are designed for use in film and music production where reproducing the highest fidelity for the engineer is what important. They are not designed to sound nice, but accurate. Their systems are typically used in small solid rooms and as most rooms in the UK are small and solid, their sub/sat approach means they work well in these sorts of spaces.

99% of floor standing speakers like the Kef Reference system mentioned are not full range. The will not play as deep or as loud as the MK 300 system and they certainly aren’t something that audio professionals would use at work.

JBL make speakers largely for the commercial market such as bars and cinemas. If you want a cost effective speaker system that will comfortably full a huge space and will work reliably their commercial products are a great solution.

I would love Phil to review Kef, JBL and any other speaker packages at a similar price to the MK 300 system to see how they compare. My hunch is you wont find the distributors of these products too eager to help as they know they are not really designed for reproducing the optimal fidelity in this sort of environment.
 
Take note one and all, for movie play back, everything is rubbish, except MK.

Ps it's not illegal to use a sub with your Kefs :thumbsup:
 
Ps it's not illegal to use a sub with your Kefs :thumbsup:

Did do and also watched Lone Survivor on them at full range while swapping out an amp plate (had some auto on issues) I personally thought they did a good job and during the helicopter scenes went pretty low - different story with the sub in tow of course.

My point re: KEF was altho they are at similar price, the MK's do a better job, party because it's the 3 same speakers in a row and I like how they give you a 'what you see is what you get' vibe. The KEF's are certainly a lot more neutral than say the B&W's I heard at £5,000 for the L+R only and they sound horrendous imo.
 
Did do and also watched Lone Survivor on them at full range while swapping out an amp plate (had some auto on issues) I personally thought they did a good job and during the helicopter scenes went pretty low - different story with the sub in tow of course.

My point re: KEF was altho they are at similar price, the MK's do a better job, party because it's the 3 same speakers in a row and I like how they give you a 'what you see is what you get' vibe. The KEF's are certainly a lot more neutral than say the B&W's I heard at £5,000 for the L+R only and they sound horrendous imo.

I think that's the kind of balanced opinion that gives genuine credibility to MK. Not the 'no other distributors will hand over their speakers because they arnt designed for reproducing optimal fidelity', clap trap.

I'd like to think that even when folk are utilising floor standers for movie playback, they'll have the knowledge that a floor stander doesbt mean a sub isn't required.
 
I did a wee 'let's see how loud this goes' test with the 300's /150 Atmos system with the end scene of American Sniper , the bit where they're held up on the roof..

Complete bonkers! it really held together and didn't clip all over the place, which is in fairness down to the Lyngdorf amps, but I was a little worried something might break.

My room is about 15x16 and then has a octagonal bay on the left wall that has 8 panes of glass and is about 6.5 feet deep in the middle and it filled that entire room easily. I'm an in-room fan boy and 'in my mind' these will always sound better than the one's with less cabinet space and they also have that toeable option.

@sammy the squid There are many good speakers and I certainly haven't heard them all, but sadly AVF doesn't get them all for review - I'm not really sure what else is in the same price bracket that isn't one of the typical higher end brands of Hi-Fi speaker... it's certainly not B&W!!

It would be nice to see some more systems compared, ones that cost more and less. I know the next step up for me would be something like, if not the Steinway systems as so far it's the best I've heard, but I'm not sure I like movies enuff to go to that next level of Trinnovs, Datsat, Steinways and whatnot.
 
Last edited:
My hunch is you wont find the distributors of these products too eager to help as they know they are not really designed for reproducing the optimal fidelity in this sort of environment.

Oh you do make me laugh [emoji23]
 
This nicely illustrates the difference between audio enthusiasts and audio professionals.

Audio professionals choose products based on their suitability for each application. For a commercial space where SPL, durability and value for money is paramount I have often used JBL’s. For a nice stereo I’ve sold many different floor standers, for professional mixing and home cinema I use MK.

Each choice is based not on an affection for the brand but on its suitability for the specific application.

I love Quad ESL63’s but I don’t recommend them because they are not the best product to deliver surround sound in domestic spaces. The same is true with Kef Reference speakers.

When you need 3 identical speakers to place around a flat screen TV or behind a projection screen these product won’t give the best performance, the best appearance or the best value for money. If you know different please showe me some examples?

The real issue with reproducing audio is overcoming the acoustic issues that every room throws up. The problems small, solid rooms create are nicely minimized by sub/sat systems. This is one of the reasons why it is the approach recommended by independent expert authorities on surround reproduction such as THX.

I expect this is also why Phil wanted to review the system - because he understands it really is designed for 5.1 reproduction to professional standards in doemstic spaces and its great to see he gave the system 10/10 both for sound quality and as an overall score.

Obviously the number of film makers who choose MK is perhaps the biggest recommendation for this approach as they are the most critical, professional users who rely on the monitors they use for their living.

Do Kef have this sort of list of professional users? If so could you post a link?
 
@sammy the squid There are many good speakers and I certainly haven't heard them all, but sadly AVF doesn't get them all for review - I'm not really sure what else is in the same price bracket that isn't one of the typical higher end brands of Hi-Fi speaker... it's certainly not B&W!!

It would be nice to see some more systems compared, ones that cost more and less. I know the next step up for me would be something like, if not the Steinway systems as so far it's the best I've heard, but I'm not sure I like movies enuff to go to that next level of Trinnovs, Datsat, Steinways and whatnot.

Thankyou Ross, your post is the voice of reason.

No ones disputing the performance of MK, but as usual, it's taking potshots at others.

Not all manufacturers are reliant on the forums, either for the purpose of reviews or advertising, you obviously know that. I'm sure not many will be keen on direct comparisons either, so I think you're unlikely to see that aspect on the forum either.

As far as alternatives go, my first suggestion is always Genelec. A rich heritage With respect to producing monitors - and speakers across a large range to suit a number of applications. All bi amplified actives to and tri amplified further up the range.
 
Thankyou Ross, your post is the voice of reason.

No ones disputing the performance of MK, but as usual, it's taking potshots at others.

Not all manufacturers are reliant on the forums, either for the purpose of reviews or advertising, you obviously know that. I'm sure not many will be keen on direct comparisons either, so I think you're unlikely to see that aspect on the forum either.

As far as alternatives go, my first suggestion is always Genelec. A rich heritage With respect to producing monitors - and speakers across a large range to suit a number of applications. All bi amplified actives to and tri amplified further up the range.


It's just my opinion based as a home and studio user. I know the likes of PSA have no problem in comparing their on paper results of their subs directly to other manufacturers insofar as you need X amount of these to = 1 of their subs.

That, imo is a little bit cheaty as it really depends on how the sub performs in the room, what eq is or isn't on it and the rest of the system - and again it's design too. MK and KK use a push pull design and Paradigm use something similar I believe and they're all good subs. I don't have any issue with those brands but there are some that just have never tickled me - REL for example.

When it comes to movie reproduction in the living room, I really like 300 series - they have that extra bit of gumption over the 150's and I like the look of them too.

I've used Genelec a few times, you'll find them dotted around studios - not as common as the Yamaha NS10's but if you plugged them into your system, you'be be very disappointed - you'd also blow them up easily. I would like to hear a Genelec home theatre I didn't know until a few years or so ago that their range extended into the living room.

With the last few gear swaps adding the Anthem and the Lyngdorf I have about faced on a few things, like DSU and oddly the new Star Wars movie - I think I'm going back to saying it's 'ok' I look forward to re runinng a few movies I haven't seen in a while - really the more familiar content you can throw at a system the better if you're planning to dem something.
 
Sammy, you have completely missed the point yet again.

None of the products are inferior to each other. Each are intended for different applications and I have happily recommended JBL, Kef, Genelec for different applications.

For 5.1 mixing and playback in domestic sized spaces however, MK are the perfect product FOR THE APPLICATION. This is why they are used so commonly in these types of professional and domestic systems and why Phil chose this system for a 5.1 review.
 
Sammy, you have completely missed the point yet again.

None of the products are inferior to each other. Each are intended for different applications and I have happily recommended JBL, Kef, Genelec for different applications.

For 5.1 mixing and playback in domestic sized spaces however, MK are the perfect product FOR THE APPLICATION. This is why they are used so commonly in these types of professional and domestic systems and why Phil chose this system for a 5.1 review.

With respect, I think it's you who misses the point.

I think people are quite capable of making their own minds up based on their own experiences, independent reviews and the views of their peers.

When you 'helpfully' point out that only the products you sell are suitable and that other retailers won't be of any use because their products are unsuitable, then you do yourself a disservice.

Let your products do the talking, leave the thinly veiled salesmanship out of the equation.
 
Obviously the number of film makers who choose MK is perhaps the biggest recommendation for this approach as they are the most critical, professional users who rely on the monitors they use for their living.

Do Kef have this sort of list of professional users? If so could you post a link?

By your own definition, everyone should buy Genelec rather than M&K then, as "professionals are the most critical", and I'd put a bet on with you that there's a lot more Genelec out there in studios than M&K ;)
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom